Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

DANIEL T. MILLS v. STATE OF MARYLAND

Criminal procedure — Judicial recusal — Prior participation as assistant attorney general

In Mills v. State, 239 Md. App. 258, 282 (2018), we concluded that the Circuit Court for Baltimore City had erred in its handling of a “Batson challenge” raised during jury selection at the trial of Daniel T. Mills, appellant. See Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986). We noted that, although Mills pointed out that the State had exercised peremptory strikes to remove four African-American venirepersons, the trial court ruled that Mills had not made a prima facie showing of racial discrimination because the trial judge had conducted a statistical analysis of the jurors. 239 Md. App. at 270. As a consequence, the trial court denied the Batson challenge without asking the State to provide race-neutral explanations for the strikes.

Read the opinion